Public record
Software health reportschema 0.14.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-19 02:41 UTC

flytohub / flyto-core

Flyto2 Core is the open-source execution kernel for automation and AI-agent workflows: 451 registry-backed modules, MCP-native transport, YAML recipes, evidence capture, replay, triggers, queue, versioning, and metering.

PythonApache-2.0★ 473 stars⑂ 82 forkssince Dec 2025View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryMCP serverhow this is determined
#ai-agents#browser-automation#mcp#model-context-protocol#open-source#python#workflow-automation#atomic-modules#ai-tools#execution-engine#llm#mcp-server#security#web-scraping#automation#low-code#playwright#rpa#workflow-engine#flyto2

flytohub/flyto-core holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (92/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (61/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

86
overall / 100
Excellent

Software health index

Metrics are grouped into weighted categories on one standardized 1–100 scale. Overall starts as their weighted mean, calibrated against the distribution of the public record so bands carry percentile meaning; when public evidence triggers the High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy, the rating is adjusted and receives an At Risk ceiling of 34.

86
Exceptional93-100The record's top tier (≈ top 5%); essentially all checked criteria met
Excellent80-92Strong across the board; minor gaps
Good65-79Healthy; gaps are limited and manageable
Moderate50-64Acceptable with notable gaps; review recommended
Weak35-49Material weaknesses across several areas
At Risk20-34Significant weaknesses; adoption warrants caution
Critical1-19Severe problems (abandoned, single-maintainer, no hygiene)
VitalityCommunity &AdoptionSustainability &GovernanceEngineeringQualitySecurityAI Readiness

Score profile

Each axis is a category. The shape matters more than the average — a healthy subject fills the whole shape, while a spike-and-crater profile means strength in one dimension is masking risk in another.

The weighted overall 72 is calibrated to 86 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

flytohubOrganization
41 followers15 public repossince Nov 2025

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIflyto-core2.26.92,6232190 days agoautomationworkflowmcpmcp-serverai-agentsai-agent-frameworkopen-source-aibrowser-automationweb-scrapingplaywrightrpaatomic-modulesworkflow-engine

Metrics by category

Vitality

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?

92Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

86Excellent
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
22.2/36Commit cadence — 32/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 470 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year470
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year32

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 8 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 7 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~29.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count8
latest_release_tagv2.26.8
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release7
mean_days_between_releases29.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

74Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

69Good
How it's scored
43.4/60Stars — 473 stars
15.9/25Forks — 82 forks
9.4/15Watchers — 51 watchers
Inputs used
forks82
stars473
watchers51
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateyes

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

57Moderate
How it's scored
45.6/80Monthly downloads — 2,623 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesflyto-core
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads2,623
unverified_packages_excluded—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

61Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

26At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3.4/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 85% of commits
10.8/13.5Contributor breadth — 8 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled8
top_contributor_share0.849

Issue & PR responsiveness

69Good
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
18.4/30PR acceptance — 27/44 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs27
open_issues0
closed_issues5
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs17
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

65Good
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
11.7/25Owner reach — 41 followers of flytohub
10/25Track record — 15 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers41
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_loginflytohub
public_repos15
account_age_days231
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 219 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesflyto-core
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

69Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

48Weak
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://flyto2.com
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 20 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsai-agents, browser-automation, mcp, model-context-protocol, open-source, python, workflow-automation, atomic-modules, ai-tools, execution-engine, llm, mcp-server, security, web-scraping, automation, low-code, playwright, rpa, workflow-engine, flyto2
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://flyto2.com
docs_sitehttps://flyto2.com
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?

65Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

65Good
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

AI Readiness

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight (4%): agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but a repository with none can still reach 100/100.

63Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

75Good
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes3,658
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

42Weak
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
54.9/55Manageable file sizes — 2/1,010 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes96,415
source_files_sampled1,010
oversized_source_files2

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
20/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples, recipes
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples, recipes
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto). Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

473GitHub stars
8contributors
470commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
8releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Could not fetch pypi package 'flyto-plugin-example' from its registry

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.5 / 10
6.5aggregate

Independent, tool-agnostic security assessment from the open-source OpenSSF Scorecard. Each check rewards a security practice, not a specific vendor's tool. Checks Scorecard could not determine are marked n/a and excluded from the security score (never counted as zero).Scorecard v5.5.0 · 2026-07-19 02:40 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
0CI-Tests0 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
1Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 8
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIflyto-core>=2.17.0plugin-template/pyproject.toml
PyPIpyyaml>=6.0.3,<7pyproject.toml
PyPIaiohttp>=3.14.1,<4pyproject.toml
PyPIbeautifulsoup4>=4.15.0,<5pyproject.toml
PyPIlxml>=6.1.0,<7pyproject.toml
PyPIpydantic>=2.4.0,<3pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-dotenv>=1.2.2,<2pyproject.toml
PyPIaiofiles>=23.2.1,<25pyproject.toml
All dependencies 28

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 8 direct and 20 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaiofiles—direct
PyPIaiohttp—direct
PyPIbeautifulsoup4—direct
PyPIflyto-core—direct
PyPIlxml—direct
PyPIpydantic—direct
PyPIpython-dotenv—direct
PyPIpyyaml—direct
PyPIblack—indirect
PyPIbuild—indirect
PyPIfastapi—indirect
PyPIfirebase-admin—indirect
PyPImypy—indirect
PyPIopenai—indirect
PyPIpillow—indirect
PyPIplaywright—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio—indirect
PyPIpytest-cov—indirect
PyPIpython-telegram-bot—indirect
PyPIqdrant-client—indirect
PyPIqrcode—indirect
PyPIrequests—indirect
PyPIruff—indirect
PyPIsentence-transformers—indirect
PyPIsetuptools—indirect
PyPItwine—indirect
PyPIuvicorn—indirect
Raw JSON report machine-readable

Feedback

Spotted something off in this report, or have thoughts to share? Wrong measurements, missed tooling, ideas, questions — anything is welcome. Every message is read and gets a response.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with flytohub/flyto-core. Read them side by side →

98n8n-io/n8nFair-code workflow automation platform with native AI capabilities. Combine visual building with custom code, self-host or cloud, 400+ integrations.Exceptional98Agenta-AI/agentaAgenta is a workspace where you and your team build agents and automations.Exceptional98modelcontextprotocol/python-sdkThe official Python SDK for Model Context Protocol servers and clientsExceptional100apache/airflowApache Airflow - A platform to programmatically author, schedule, and monitor workflowsExceptional100deepset-ai/haystackOpen-source AI orchestration framework for building context-engineered, production-ready LLM applications. Design modular pipelines and agent workflows with explicit control over retrieval, routing, memory, and generation. Built for scalable agents, RAG, multimodal applications, semantic search, and conversational systems.Exceptional100PrefectHQ/prefectPrefect is a workflow orchestration framework for building resilient data pipelines in Python.Exceptional

Scores are signals, not warranties. They reflect publicly visible practices on GitHub — not a code audit, and not a security guarantee.

Missing data is excluded and weights renormalized, never scored as zero. Methodology is versioned and open: metrics v2.10.0, schema v0.14.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — PyPI.